DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND BRITISH BRANDING

That this House is deeply disappointed and frustrated by the lack of reference to Britain, and in particular the country's flag, in the branding used by the Department for International Development (DFID) when working on development projects abroad; believes the current DFID branding is meaningless and does not effectively convey the origins of the funding provided by British taxpayers to those people that it is helping; considers the stripping out of the British brand by DFID in order to stop the Department from being subsumed into foreign policy has gone too far; further considers that Britain should instead follow the lead of other organisations across the world such as the United Nations, the European Union and United States Agency for International Development in clearly stating the origins of its aid; and calls on the Government to introduce a small Union Jack on all DFID branding overseas, sending a clear message that the UK is proud of those representing its nation and what they are doing.